Comparison of the Concept of Command Responsibility in Human Rights Court Provisions

The new spirit of human rights enforcement in Indonesia through the ratification of Law no. 26 of 2000 became the main pillar to accommodate issues that attracted International attention. Law No. 26 of 2000 has shown the importance of regulating human rights enforcement, the regulation is also the main instrument to protect and guarantee human rights enforcement mechanisms in Indonesia. The author takes a legal problem on the comparative law of Law no. 26 of 2000 concerning the Human Rights Court which was adopted from the provisions of the 1998 Rome Statute. Several human rights activists took action, this was because the 1998 Rome Statute provisions were adopted imperfectly in article 42 of Law no. 26 of 2000 which caused problems in the enforcement of the Human Rights Court. Some of the perpetrators of gross human rights violations in Indonesia are generally parties with power or position, who can escape the applicable legal sanctions and are free from responsibility for the actions that have been committed by them or their groups. So it is important for the development of human rights in Indonesia to improve the norms of command responsibility in Article 42 of Law no. 26 of 2000. Based on these issues, the author will integrate several comparative laws and principles to get a concrete solution. The purpose of this research is to build a legal framework to strengthen the enforcement of Indonesian human rights. The methodology that will be used is a normative method with a conceptual approach. The findings of this study reveal that several human rights violations by the Command in Indonesia have not yet been resolved properly and have attracted International attention. In theoretical studies, the existence of the principle of command responsibility is considered difficult to prove in court. The involvement of human rights violators by the TNI command in several cases is evidence that the implementation of the command responsibility mechanism in human rights violations is far from being expected